Letters

1) I find it distasteful to apply to Dr. Pianka the pejorative appellation of Dr. Doom. Mr Gallien seems to have not attended any of Dr. Pianka's lectures, and therefore should not repeat that appellation, invented by Pianka's enemies, who obviously hate Dr. Pianka for reasons of their own.

As Mr. Gallien correctly points out, doomsday prophecies are commonplace in religious literature, including the Bible, so the creos who worship the Bible are quite inconsistent believing the word of the Bible but repudiating Dr. Pianka. Many religious leaders deserve the title of Mr. Doom at least to the same extent as Pianka.

2) Contrary to Mr. Gallien's assertion, Dr. Pianka need not "clear his name." His name has been smeared by the likes of Mims, but the accusers have no credibility, and the burden of proof is Mims's rather than Pianka's. Mr. Gallien's reference to unnamed students who allegedly support Mims's report is unsubstantiated. Which students? Where was their take on Pianka's talk published?

3) Mr. Gallien doubts that Pianka would admit what he has in fact said unless the text of his presentation became available. OK, look at the story as delivered by Mims. How plausible is it that in a speech on the occasion of being honored by colleagues, a scientist would call for killing billions of human beings (as Mims's report alleged?) Moreover, how plausible is it that 400 scientists would give a standing ovation to a person uttering such horrifying suggestions? There is something doubtful in Mims's report, even without seeing the transcripts of Pianka's presentation.

Then the text of Pianka's talks got published (which is what Gallien has belatedly suggested, apparently being not familiar with these publications). From these transcripts it became clear that Mims distorted Pianka's words while Pianka told the truth.

Confronted with facts, some of the erstwhile accusers of Pianka have reversed their course. The Seguin Gazette-Enterprize newspaper, the first to break the story, has promptly removed from their website all original material about Pianka's alleged objectionable utterances. Even such a passionately pro-ID website as Telic Thought apologized for reporting Mims's untrue accusations and admitted that Pianka actually did not say the most egregious things Mims attributed to him. (While I view Telic Thought as a collection of highly biased anti-evolution messages, I commend them for admitting that they were in error by relying on Mims.)

4) While, as Mr. Gallien tell us, a pro-ID site refused to post his contribution, Talk Reason let his letter appear -- and this fact speaks for itself.

In my reply to Mr. Gallien I mentioned that the Seguin Gazette-Enterprise has removed from its website the material related to Pianka's affair. This statement was based on reports posted on several websites, as I personally have not checked the Gazette-Enterprise website. According to more recent reports, the material related to Pianka's affair has been reinstated (at least partially) at the Seguin Gazette-Enterprise website. Regarding the Telic Thought website, I have personally seen there a post containing a retraction of their initial assault on Pianka.